DOCSLIB.ORG

ÇANAKKALE ARAŞTIRMALARI TÜRK YILLIĞI Yıl 15 Güz 2017 Sayı 23 Ss

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
ÇANAKKALE ARAŞTIRMALARI TÜRK YILLIĞI Yıl 15 Güz 2017 Sayı 23 Ss ÇANAKKALE ARAŞTIRMALARI TÜRK YILLIĞI Yıl 15 Güz 2017 Sayı 23 ss. 247-264 Geliş Tarihi: 11.10.2017 Kabul Tarihi: 18.10.2017 On the Fate of Ottoman Cultural Properties during the Gallipoli Campaign Turan TAKAOĞLU* Mithat ATABAY** Öz Bu çalışma Birinci Dünya Savaşı sırasında Çanakkale Savaşı esnasında İtilaf devletleri askeri güçlerinin Çanakkale Boğazının Trakya ve Anadolu kısımlarında kalan topraklarında bulunan askeri nitelik taşımayan mimari yapılar üzerinde yaptığı tahribatın boyutlarını irdelemeyi amaçlar. Savaş ve uyuşmazlık zamanlarında kimlik, inanç ve ortak hafıza gibi milli kimliği temsil eden kültür varlıkları veya sivil ve mimari öğeler düşman güçler tarafından çoğu zaman hep bilerek hedef alındığı durumlar olmuştur. Kale ve benzeri askeri yapılar savaş zamanında canlı hedefler olduğundan dolayı savaş gemileri ve uçakların her zaman hedefleri doğru bir şekilde vuramadığından dolayı söz konusu askeri yapılar etrafında bulunan yapılara kasti olmayan hasarlar da verilmiş olduğu durumlar vardır. Ancak, 1915 yılına ait bazı tarihi Osmanlı belgeleri Çanakkale Savaşı sırasında İtilaf devletlerinin havadan veya denizden yaptığı bombardımanlar sonucu bazı askeri karakteri olmayan Osmanlı kültür varlıklarının belirli oranda tahrip olduğu ve hatta bu tahribatların bazılarının gereksiz yere bilinçli olarak yapıldığı dikkat çeker. Bunun sonucu olarak Çanakkale Savaşı sırasında ve hemen öncesinde askeri yapıları barındıran ve Çanakkale Boğazı’nın güney kıyısı yerleşimlerinden Çanakkale (Çanak, Kale-i Sultaniye), Erenköy ve Kumkale gibi yerleşimler yanında Gelibolu Yarımadası’nda bulunan Seddülbahir ve Bolayır konumları gereği sivil ve dini mimarilerinde tahribat yaşamışlardır. Gelibolu Yarımadası bünyesinde stratejik konumlarda bulunan Maydos ve Krtihia köyleri de İtilaf devletlerinin hedef haline geldiğinden buralarda bulunan bazı sivil ve dini mimari yapılarda tahribat yaşanmıştır. Osmanlı kültür mirasının korunmasına yönelik Türklerce alınan bazı önlemlerin de olması da bu bağlamda dikkat çekici bir durumdur. Tarihi belgelerin fotoğrafik belgeler ışığında irdelenmesi İtilaf Devletleri güçlerinin iyi hesaplanmamış olan ve askeri nitelikte olmayan bir çok yapıda tahribata neden olan deniz ve hava saldırılarının Çanakkale Savaşı sırasında insaniyete ve imza atılan * Turan TAKAOĞLU, Prof. Dr., Çanakkale Onsekiz Mart University, Department of Archaeology, e-mail: [email protected] ** Mithat ATABAY, Yrd. Doç. Çanakkale Onsekiz Mart University, Department of History, e-mail: [email protected] 247 Turan Takaoğlu & Mithat Atabay uluslararası antlaşmalara aykırı bir biçimde ölçülerin ötesine geçtiğini düşündürür. Anahtar Kelimeler: Çanakkale Savaşı, 1915, sivil ve dini mimari, tahribat, bombardıman Abstract This paper aims to evaluate the extent of damage caused to Ottoman cultural properties by the Allied forces during the Gallipoli Campaign, which took place during the First World War both on the Thracian and Asian sides of the Dardanelles. In times of war or armed conflict, cultural properties representing the identity, faith, and shared values that help to reinforce a sense of national identity often become inadvertent targets by opposing forces. There might have been cases in which Ottoman cultural properties located around military such as fortresses and artilleries that were viable targets in wartime were damaged unintentionally. However, certain Ottoman historical sources dating to 1915 seemingly attest to deliberate destruction of Ottoman buildings of non-military character by bombardments from the battleships and aircraft of the Allied Forces. As a result, certain Ottoman civilian and religious structures located around the military installations at Çanakkale (Chanak, Kale-i Sultaniye), Erenköy, and Kumkale on the southern shores of the Dardanelles as well as Seddülbahir and Bolayır on the Gallipoli Peninsula witnessed damage because of their location. Such villages as Maydos and Krithia located at strategic locations in the Gallipoli Peninsula also became targets of the Allied forces. This paper in this context aims to determine the degree to which Ottoman cultural properties were affected by direct and indirect gun-fire and bombardment during the Gallipoli Campaign. In addition, several examples of Turkish efforts to protect the cultural properties from being harmed by bombardment from the Anglo-French Allies are also briefly outlined here. The evaluation of historical sources in relation to photographic data demonstrates that the naval and aerial assaults resulting in the damage to the Ottoman cultural properties were beyond the limits during the Gallipoli Campaign, which could not be explained in human terms and international conventions. Key words: Gallipoli Campaign, 1915, non-military structures, damage, bombardment 248 On the Fate of Ottoman Cultural Properties during the Gallipoli Campaign The Gallipoli Campaign that took place between 25th April 1915 and 9th Janu- ary 1916 was undoubtedly one of the most heroic battles ever fought by the Turks as it was a unexpected military disaster with heavy casualties to the Allied Forces who intended both to knock the Ottoman Empire out of the war and to re-open the sea route between Europe and Russia by seizing Constantinople during the First World War. Turkish casualties were also enormous, exceeding the Allies in number. The Gallipoli Campaign was first initiated with naval operations and raiding parties by Anglo-French ships in the months of February and March 1915 on both sides of the Dardanelles Strait, followed by a full-scale landings on the Gallipoli Peninsula by British and French troops including the Australian and New Zealand Army Corps (ANZAC) on April 25. The last naval attempt to force a passage up the Dardanelles on March 18 had ended with the sinking of three battleships of the Al- lied Forces, while the land operations that succeeded the naval failure, beginning on April 25, also did not favor of the British, French and ANZAC troops, who met fierce opposition. The purpose of this military operation was basically to assist the fleet in forcing the Dardanelles strait by taking from the rear the Ottoman fortresses located on the European side of the Strait and to obtain a vantage point from which fortresses on the Asiatic side could be dominated. Despite the fact that the Gallipoli Campaign ended with heavy casualties on both sides, the most important outcome of the war was the sense of collective consciousness and patriotism that it created among the Turks at the onset of the creation of the modern Turkish Republic. The Gallipoli Campaign also became a national narrative for Australia and New Zealand (Sagona et al. 2016). Although the literature on various aspects of this historical event yearly incre- ases, the long-neglected issue of how the buildings of non-military character of the Ottoman Empire around the Dardanelles were affected by this campaign has unfortu- nately not been examined. A work by Ahmet Esenkaya (2004) represents the first th- rough study of the inhumane acts that were committed by the Allied Forces during the Gallipoli Campaign despite that fact that they were among the signatory countries of the international conventions related to the times of war. This valuable work, bringing together information derived from a series of documents from the Ottoman archives, Ottoman newspapers, and the accounts of Ottoman military officers, demonstrates that the Allied forces carelessly assaulted the locations that had no military character at all both during and at the onset of the Gallipoli Campaign for some reasons. This paper in this context aims to examine the extent of damage caused to Ot- toman non-military buildings by the Allied forces during the Gallipoli Campaign. The Gallipoli Campaign indeed witnessed damage to numerous Ottoman non-military structures by aerial and naval bombardments, despite fact that the Ottoman Empire was one of the signatories of three different Hague conventions signed in 1899 and 1907 along with Britain and France. The earliest Article 27 of the Hague Convention 249 Turan Takaoğlu & Mithat Atabay signed on 29 July 1899. This article rules that 1: “In sieges and bombardments all ne- cessary steps should be taken to spare as far as possible edifices devoted to religion, art, science, and charity … provided they are not being used at the time for military purposes. It is the duty of the besieged to indicate the presence of such buildings or places by distinctive and visible signs, which shall be notified to the enemy before- hand.” Article 27 of the Hague convention (IV) signed on 18th October in 1907 added historic monuments, hospitals, and places where the sick and wounded are collected.2 Most important of all, Article 5 of the 1907 Hague Convention (IX) concerning Bombardment by Naval Forces in Times of War provides that 3: In bombardments by naval forces all the necessary measures must be taken by the commander to spare as far as possible sacred edifices, buildings used for artistic, scientific or charitable purposes, … on the understanding that they are not used at the same time for military purposes. It is the duty of the inhabitants to indicate such monuments, edifices or places by visible signs, which shall consist of large, stiff rectangular panels divided diagonally into two colored triangular portions, the upper portion black, the lower portion white. The stripes observed on the minarets of several mosques located on both sides of the Dardanelles Strait, including Çanakkale town and the village of Ki-
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Gallipoli Campaign
    tHe GaLlIpOlI CaMpAiGn The Gallipoli Campaign was an attack on the Gallipoli peninsula during World War I, between 25 April 1915 and 9 January 1916. The Gallipoli peninsula was an important tactical position during World War I. The British War Council suggested that Germany could be defeated by attacks on her allies, Austria, Hungary and Turkey. The Allied forces of the British Empire (including Australia and New Zealand) aimed to force a passage through the Dardanelles Strait and capture the Turkish capital, Constantinople. At dawn on 25 April 1915, Anzac assault troops landed north of Gaba Tepe, at what became known as Anzac Cove, while the British forces landed at Cape Helles on the Gallipoli Peninsula. The campaign was a brave but costly failure. By December 1915 plans were drawn up to evacuate the entire force from Gallipoli. On 19 and 20 December, the evacuation of over 142,000 men from Anzac Cove commenced and was completed three weeks later with minimal casualties. In total, the whole Gallipoli campaign caused 26,111 Australian casualties, including 8,141 deaths. Since 1916 the anniversary of the landings on 25 April has been commemorated as Anzac Day, becoming one of the most important national celebrations in Australia and New Zealand. tHe GaLlIpOlI CaMpAiGn The Gallipoli Campaign was an attack on the Gallipoli peninsula during World War I, between 25 April 1915 and 9 January 1916. The Gallipoli peninsula was an important tactical position during World War I. The British War Council suggested that Germany could be defeated by attacks on her allies, Austria, Hungary and Turkey.
    [Show full text]
  • With the Judeans in the Palestine Campaign the Macmillan Company Kbwyork • Boston • Chicago • Daixas Atlanta • San Francisco
    ^^0^ ^(y a' ^0^ o^, *. ^V ^q,/*Tr.-* ^<^/o ^-^^ .o^\i^:.'/%''"'-^'''' 1--•^^ c\. "^0'^ o. %-!-:.-.- *« 'i;' vV <^ ''o ^^-n^A. ,0 * " A*^ '^<,.''*'o,T** .0^ \^ *^^^'* '^<^"*-o.?*' .0^ ^• ^^M^^ o\ />*^<^ •; '^^ 5>^ •!nL% Ik A? * > .0^ '"^-. ^^ ^^ * \<,^' ' > 4.*' ''*^_ <p^ .1-4-*' ..• -• ..I'^L', .'.^ia' % " ' *-./ - "'^.c.^^ WITH THE JUDEANS IN THE PALESTINE CAMPAIGN THE MACMILLAN COMPANY KBWYORK • BOSTON • CHICAGO • DAIXAS ATLANTA • SAN FRANCISCO MACMILLAN & CO.. Limited LONDON • BOMBAY • CALCUTTA MELBOURNE THE MACMILLAN CO. OP CANADA. Ltd. TORONTO PHYSICAL MAP OF PALESTINE Scale of miles 6 10 20 40 60 80 100 Scale of kilometres 6 10 20 40 GO 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 WITH THE JUDEANS IN THE PALESTINE CAMPAIGN BY LIEUT.-COLONEL J. H. PATTERSON, D.S.C. AUTHOR OF "the MAN-EATERS OF TSAVo/' "iN THE GRIP OF THE NYIKa/' "wITH THE ZIONISTS IN GALLIPOH" THE MACMILLAN COMPANY 1922 All rights reserved PRINTED IN THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA. 1\^'. ^'^.y' Copyright, 1922, By the MACMILLAN COMPANY. Set up and electrotyped. Published, November, 1922. FERRIS PRINTING COMPANY NEW YORK CITY -6 DEC '22 C1A692250 PREFACE THE formation of a Battalion of Jews for service in the British Army is an event with: out precedent in our annals, and the part played by such a unique unit is assured of a niche in history, owing to the fact that it fought in Palestine, not only for the British cause, but also for the Restoration of the Jewish people to the Promised Land. In writing the following- narrative, my object has been to give a faithful account of the doings of this Jewish Battalion while it was under my command.
    [Show full text]
  • Master Thesis Set out to Find out What Kind of Picture of Egypt the British Military Personnel Portrayed to Their Friends and Family Back at Home
    Nuancing the picture of Egypt A study of how Egypt was portrayed home by British military personnel during the First World War University of Bergen Master’s thesis Department of Archaeology, History, Cultural Studies and Religion Autumn 2020 Sigrid Buhaug Kluck 1 Table of contents Sammendrag ............................................................................................................................................. 4 Preface ...................................................................................................................................................... 5 Chapter 1: Introduction and methodology................................................................................................. 6 Methodology and sources .................................................................................................................................. 10 Letters ................................................................................................................................................................ 13 Postcards ........................................................................................................................................................... 15 Photographs ....................................................................................................................................................... 16 Chapter 2: Historical background ........................................................................................................... 18 Egypt 1869-1914
    [Show full text]
  • The Great War Began at the End of July 1914 with the Triple Entente
    ANZAC SURGEONS OF GALLIPOLI The Great War began at the end of July 1914 with the Triple Entente (Britain, France and Russia) aligned against the Triple Alliance (Germany, Austria- Hungary and Italy). By December, the Alliance powers had been joined by the Ottoman Turks; and in January 1915 the Russians, pressured by German and Turkish forces in the Caucasus, asked the British to open up another front. Hamilton second from right: There is nothing certain about war except that one side won’t win. AWM H10350 A naval campaign against Turkey was devised by the British The Turkish forces Secretary of State for War Lord Kitchener and the First Sea Lord, Winston Churchill. In 1913, Enver Pasha became Minister of War and de-facto Commander in Chief of the Turkish forces. He commanded It was intended that allied ships would destroy Turkish the Ottoman Army in 1914 when they were defeated by fortifications and open up the Straits of the Dardanelles, thus the Russians at the Battle of Sarikamiş and also forged the enabling the capture of Constantinople. alliance with Germany in 1914. In March 1915 he handed over control of the Ottoman 5th army to the German General Otto Liman von Sanders. It was intended that allied Von Sanders recognised the allies could not take Constantinople without a combined land and sea attack. ships would destroy Turkish In his account of the campaign, he commented on the small force of 60,000 men under his command but noted: The fortifications British gave me four weeks before their great landing.
    [Show full text]
  • The Forgotten Fronts the First World War Battlefield Guide: World War Battlefield First the the Forgotten Fronts Forgotten The
    Ed 1 Nov 2016 1 Nov Ed The First World War Battlefield Guide: Volume 2 The Forgotten Fronts The First Battlefield War World Guide: The Forgotten Fronts Creative Media Design ADR005472 Edition 1 November 2016 THE FORGOTTEN FRONTS | i The First World War Battlefield Guide: Volume 2 The British Army Campaign Guide to the Forgotten Fronts of the First World War 1st Edition November 2016 Acknowledgement The publisher wishes to acknowledge the assistance of the following organisations in providing text, images, multimedia links and sketch maps for this volume: Defence Geographic Centre, Imperial War Museum, Army Historical Branch, Air Historical Branch, Army Records Society,National Portrait Gallery, Tank Museum, National Army Museum, Royal Green Jackets Museum,Shepard Trust, Royal Australian Navy, Australian Defence, Royal Artillery Historical Trust, National Archive, Canadian War Museum, National Archives of Canada, The Times, RAF Museum, Wikimedia Commons, USAF, US Library of Congress. The Cover Images Front Cover: (1) Wounded soldier of the 10th Battalion, Black Watch being carried out of a communication trench on the ‘Birdcage’ Line near Salonika, February 1916 © IWM; (2) The advance through Palestine and the Battle of Megiddo: A sergeant directs orders whilst standing on one of the wooden saddles of the Camel Transport Corps © IWM (3) Soldiers of the Royal Army Service Corps outside a Field Ambulance Station. © IWM Inside Front Cover: Helles Memorial, Gallipoli © Barbara Taylor Back Cover: ‘Blood Swept Lands and Seas of Red’ at the Tower of London © Julia Gavin ii | THE FORGOTTEN FRONTS THE FORGOTTEN FRONTS | iii ISBN: 978-1-874346-46-3 First published in November 2016 by Creative Media Designs, Army Headquarters, Andover.
    [Show full text]
  • Anzacs and the Great
    SARAH MIDFORD Gallipoli, Anzacs and the Great War La Trobe University eBureau Melbourne,VIC3086,Australia www.latrobe.edu.au PublishedinAustraliabyLaTrobeUniversity LaTrobeUniversity2017© Firstpublished2017 Copyright Information CopyrightinthisworkisvestedinLaTrobeUniversity.Unless otherwisestated,materialwithinthisworkislicensedundera CreativeCommonsAttribution-NonCommercial-NonDerivatives License CCBY-NC-ND http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ ISBN978-0-9953727-1-9 DOIhttps://doi.org/10.26826/1002 Other information EditedanddesignedbyBiotext Enquiries: [email protected] 2   Gallipoli, Anzacs and the Great War SARAH MIDFORD 3   Contents Introduction 4 Chapter 1: HistoryofGallipoliand theregion 23 Chapter 2: BattlefieldGallipoli 38 Chapter 3: TheGallipoliarmistice 55 Chapter 4: Enduringthewar 59 Chapter 5: BroadeningthedefinitionofAnzac 79 Chapter 6: Grief,commemorationandmemory 93 Chapter 7: Anzaclegacy 105 About the author .Sarah MidfordisaLecturerintheSchoolof whencomposingtheAustralianAnzacnarrative HumanitiesandSocialSciencesatLaTrobe Herresearchfocusesontheculturalimpactofwar University.SheteachesClassics,Australian inhistory,literatureandcommemorativeprocesses StudiesandInterdisciplinaryStudiesandin throughouthistory,anddrawsconnections 2016receivedanAustralian Award for University betweentheancientandmodernworlds.Sheis Teachingforonlinecurriculumdesign.Sarah’sPhD,
    [Show full text]
  • Islam and the Great War in the Middle East, 1914–1918
    Journal of the British Academy, 4, 1–20. DOI 10.5871/jba/004.001 Posted 19 January 2016. © The British Academy 2016 Rival jihads: Islam and the Great War in the Middle East, 1914–1918 Elie Kedourie Memorial Lecture read 8 July 2014 EUGENE ROGAN Abstract: The Ottoman Empire, under pressure from its ally Germany, declared a jihad shortly after entering the First World War. The move was calculated to rouse Muslims in the British, French and Russian empires to rebellion. Dismissed at the time and since as a ‘jihad made in Germany’, the Ottoman attempt to turn the Great War into a holy war failed to provoke mass revolt in any part of the Muslim world. Yet, as German Orientalists predicted, the mere threat of such a rebellion, particularly in British India, was enough to force Britain and its allies to divert scarce manpower and materiel away from the main theatre of operations in the Western Front to the Ottoman front. The deepening of Britain’s engagement in the Middle Eastern theatre of war across the four years of World War I can be attributed in large part to combating the threat of jihad. Keywords: Ottoman Empire, Great War, jihad, WWI, Middle East. The Ottoman entry into the First World War should have provoked little or no concern in European capitals. For decades, the West had dismissed the Ottoman Empire as Europe’s sick man.1 Since the late 1870s, the European powers had carved out whole swathes of Ottoman territory for their empires with impunity. The Russians annexed the Caucasian provinces of Kars, Ardahan and Batum in 1878.
    [Show full text]
  • Gallipoli in the First World War*
    Gallipoli in the First World War* Prepared by Prof. Dr. Recep Boztemur Middle E ast T echnical University * Text and some pictures are quoted from www.canakkale.gen.tr 77 THE FIRST WORLD WAR In the beginning of the 20th century, Europe was overflowing from its frontiers. Economical rivalry, imperialism, and nationalist movements were dividing the continent into two blocs. The conflict was rising between Germany-France and Russia-Austria. The tension in Europe had reached its highest point on 28 June 1914 with the assassination of Archduke Ferdinand, heir of the Austro-Hungarian throne by a Serbian nationalist. On 28 July 1914, Austria had declared mobilisation then the Great War began. In Europe, two blocs had appeared: the Central Powers (Germany, Austro-Hungary and Italy) and the Triple Alliance (Britain, France, and Russia). With the outbreak of the war, Italy had declared neutrality but one year later joined the Triple Alliance. On the other hand, the Ottoman Empire was losing its large territories in which many nations and beliefs had persisted for over 600 years. Both internal and external conflicts and wars were weakening the strength of the Ottoman Empire. Finally, the Ottoman Empire, with a series of military defeats in Tripoli and in the Balkans, lost nearly all its territories in Europe except the Trace. Moreover, it lost its power and international prestige. From then on, the death of the empire was certain and European powers were planing to share the heritage. As seen, the Twentieth Century had compelled the Turks to grant zones of influence to European powers: Britain (Egypt-Palestine), France (Syria and the Lebanon), Austria-Hungary (Bosnia-Herzegovina), and Italy (Libya).
    [Show full text]
  • Re-Reading the Past:Two Armenian Memoirs from the Ottoman Army and Official Turkish Historiography
    RE-READING THE PAST: TWO ARMENIAN MEMOIRS FROM THE OTTOMAN ARMY AND OFFICIAL TURKISH HISTORIOGRAPHY By Idil Onen Submitted to Central European University Department of History In partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts Supervisor: Professor Nadia Al-Bagdadi Second Reader: Associate Professor Brett Wilson CEU eTD Collection Budapest, Hungary 2017 Copyright in the text of this thesis rests with the Author. Copies by any process, either in full or part, may be made only in accordance with the instructions given by the Author and lodged in the Central European Library. Details may be obtained from the librarian. This page must form a part of any such copies made. Further copies made in accordance with such instructions may not be made without the written permission of the Author. CEU eTD Collection Abstract The aim of my research is to analyze the position of two Armenian officers’ memoir who participated the First World War in the Ottoman Army. In order to do so, I will examine the memoirs of the Second Lieutenant Kalusd Sürmenyan, who wrote a part of his book on his hometown Erzincan in 1947, and Captain Sarkis Torosyan, who published his memoirs in the Unites States of America in 1947. To accomplish the analysis of these historical texts and their context, the two research questions will direct my study: first, deals with how these officers were seen and remembered by Turkish historiography, either through their treatment or their erasure, while the second attempts to re-consider the end of the Ottoman empire turning to these two army officers themselves and expressing their memories and experiences.
    [Show full text]
  • The Role of the Ottoman Empire in the First World War
    Salve Regina University Digital Commons @ Salve Regina Pell Scholars and Senior Theses Salve's Dissertations and Theses 6-1-2009 The Sick Man’s Last Fight: The Role of the Ottoman Empire in the First World War Henry A. Crouse Salve Regina University, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.salve.edu/pell_theses Part of the European History Commons, and the Islamic World and Near East History Commons Crouse, Henry A., "The Sick Man’s Last Fight: The Role of the Ottoman Empire in the First World War" (2009). Pell Scholars and Senior Theses. 40. https://digitalcommons.salve.edu/pell_theses/40 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Salve's Dissertations and Theses at Digital Commons @ Salve Regina. It has been accepted for inclusion in Pell Scholars and Senior Theses by an authorized administrator of Digital Commons @ Salve Regina. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Crouse 1 The Sick Man’s Last Fight: The Role of the Ottoman Empire in the First World War “O Muslims, know that our Empire is at war with the mortal enemies of Islam: the governments of Muscovy, Britain, and France. The commander of the Faithful summons you to Jihad.” Henry A. Crouse HIS 490-01: Senior Seminar Brother John Buckley, FSC, Ph.D. June 5, 2009 Crouse 2 The Great War in 1914 to 1918 destroyed mighty empires, and created nations from their ashes. Both the Allied and Central Powers had been dominated by powerful empires. The Ottoman Empire, established by the Turks was at one point the largest empire in the world.
    [Show full text]
  • Gungor on Ulrichsen, 'The First World War in the Middle East'
    H-War Gungor on Ulrichsen, 'The First World War in the Middle East' Review published on Wednesday, January 13, 2016 Kristian Coates Ulrichsen. The First World War in the Middle East. London: Hurst & Co., 2014. xiii + 263 pp. $35.00 (cloth), ISBN 978-1-84904-274-1. Reviewed by Hakan Gungor (Florida State University)Published on H-War (January, 2016) Commissioned by Margaret Sankey Kristian Coates Ulrichsen presents a multidimensional perspective of the First World War in the Middle East. The First World War in the Middle East endeavors to demonstrate how the roots of ongoing issues such as Arab nationalism, political Islam, Arab-Israeli conflict, and even terrorism lay in the legacies and decisions of the Great War. His work, thus, examines the military campaigns, political decisions, and diplomatic engagements from the end of Tanzimat in 1876 to the Treaty of Lausanne in 1923. Although the author covers a large period, the core of the book spans from 1914 to 1918. Ulrichsen effectively shows how the war shaped people’s identities and everlasting problems through examinations of the major campaigns in the region: Dardanelles, Mesopotamia, and Caucasus. The author divides the work in three parts. In the first part, which includes two chapters, Ulrichsen examines the overlapping interests of the British, French, Ottomans, Germans, and Russians in the Middle East before 1914. The author argues that colonial penetration in the region and competing in interests ignited “pan-Arab[ism]” and the sense “of belonging” (p. 12). Direct Western intervention in the politics and economics of the region, as seen in the Urabi Revolution in Egypt, brought about a forceful response to colonialism.
    [Show full text]
  • Trench Warfare Events of the War
    SECTION 2 A New Kind of War Getting Started BEFORE Y OU R EAD Take notes 5SETHEInteractive Reader and Study Guide on the TOFAMILIARIZESTUDENTSWITHTHESECTION MAIN I DEA READING F OCUS KEY T ERMS weapons and technology of the battlefield and the CONTENT With the introduction of 1. How was the World War I trench warfare events of the war. new types of warfare and battlefield different than total war Interactive Reader and Study Guide, new technologies, World those of earlier wars? propaganda Section 2 War I resulted in destruc- 2. How did the war affect the Battle of Verdun tion on a scale never home front? Gallipoli Campaign Name _____________________________ Class _________________ Date __________________ before imagined. 3. genocide World War I What happened on the Section 2 Western Front? MAIN IDEA With the introduction of new types of warfare and new technologies, World War I 4. How did the war spread resulted in destruction on a scale never before imagined. around the world? Key Terms and People trench warfare war fought from trenches total war war that requires the use of all of society’s resources propaganda information designed to influence people’s opinions Battle of Verdun battle in which Germany tried to kill as many French soldiers as possible, believing the French could not bear to see this historic city captured Gallipoli Campaign Allied effort to destroy the Central Powers’ guns and forts that lined POISON the Dardanelles genocide the deliberate destruction of a racial, political, or cultural group Taking Notes As you read the summary, take notes on the weapons and technology of the FROM THE SKY battlefield and the events of the war in a graphic organizer like this one.
    [Show full text]